Following a report recently compiled by university faculty and staff, the general education curriculum courses familiar to Ohio State students for almost 20 years could soon receive an organizational face-lift to better meet the needs of an academically changing student body.
The Committee for the University-wide Review of Undergraduate Education, created in the autumn of 2004 by Executive Vice President and Provost Barbara Snyder, said within the report the current GEC is “out of step” and “designed for a less well-prepared student body than we currently find at OSU.”
“If I had to identify a ‘main’ driving force (behind the desired changes), it would be the fact of the steadily improving preparation of incoming students over the years since the last time general education was overhauled here, back in 1988,” said Brian McHale, committee chairman and professor of English and humanities, in an e-mail.
Of particular interest to the committee is developing a curriculum that can be more easily and flexibly navigated by students when scheduling, and one that is more concise than its predecessor. The new Non-Major Requirement structure would require 180 credit hours for graduation, down from the current 191.
According to the report, a new freshman cluster program would be implemented in hopes of “increasing student enthusiasm for interdisciplinary learning early in their college career,” along with giving first-year students more contact with faculty.
Formulated from a program currently in use at the University of California-Los Angeles, the cluster system would let incoming freshman enroll in a yearlong sequence of three courses which would address one interdisciplinary theme – such as “the global environment,” or “the democratic experience,” – and, in completion, would fulfill roughly 40 percent of the student’s NMR requirements in their first year.
Though the proposed changes could still go forward without the cluster program gaining acceptance, McHale said it is the element which brings something “innovative and exciting” to the curriculum.
“We wanted to re-energize general education, and it’s the freshman cluster program that does that,” he said.
Snyder said the program is crucial to providing a bigger window of academia to new students.
“If the goal is to offer more opportunities for students, the goal is not as successful without clusters,” Snyder said.
The report describes the NMR program as being more streamlined, coherent and flexible than the current GEC system, which the committee said can lead students to fulfill requirements in a somewhat disorganized and ineffective method when scheduling. The program is broken down into three class categories which will differ from major to major – demonstrated cultural competencies, demonstrated breadth of knowledge and demonstrated skills – each with their subsequent subcategories of classes. A capstone experience element will also be incorporated into the revisions, which is comparable to current 597 courses.
In addition, a third writing course is proposed to be required for all majors – an element that is in the writing of the current GEC program but has only been incorporated within a few majors.
With the advent of the freshman cluster program and the plan to have NMR courses more closely relate to individual majors, Martha Garland, vice provost and dean of undergraduate studies for the Office of Academic Affairs, said she hopes the changes will encourage more students to engage in minors and double majors. This could become more common because of the system’s improved class flexibility and its fewer credit hour requirements, which will allow more time for such choices she said.
Although the proposal is still in its infancy – currently in the stage of review by the university community until March 15 – committee members are upbeat about the possibilities the new NMR format could offer future students, possibly as soon as autumn 2007, Snyder said.
Undergraduate Student Government President Suz Scharer said the program responds to complaints made about too many GEC requirements and too many that do not correspond with students’ majors. Scharer said she agreed with the freshman cluster recommendation, saying its “team-taught environment” will be an improvement to the First-Year Experience.
Louis Pastor, representing USG within the committee, said the NMR program’s proposal of lower credit hour requirements to 180 should both increase OSU’s educational standards as well as promote responsibility among the student body as to how to use their credit hours in the most effective manner possible.
Committee member W. Randy Smith, vice provost for Curriculum and Institutional Relations, said the proposal will go to the Committee of Academic Affairs by May 1, followed by a response-gathering period from May through September from all university colleges. Afterward, the recommendations will go through the University Senate process for approval in autumn 2006, ensuring school recruitment officials will be able to inform future students of the educational system.
In addition to gaining acceptance from OSU faculty and staff, Snyder said student reaction to the reformation will play a critical role in the decision-making process.
“We did this for students and in response from student concerns over time, and we need to know if we hit the right notes with this fundamentally,” Snyder said. “I can’t say enough how important it is to hear from the student body and student government.”
One component of the proposal that has drawn initial criticism is that of the possible foreign language requirements for all colleges. The recommendation in the report said each college will determine whether course work through level 104 will be required and for “alternative mechanisms for encouraging advanced course work in foreign languages be implemented in the NMR” under the demonstrated cultural competencies category.
Based on student surveys, much of the student body said the foreign language requirement is “onerous” rather than an asset that encourages further coursework in a foreign language, the report said.
Diane Birckbichler, director of the Foreign Language Center, said she and those within the department were “very disappointed and surprised” by the committee’s report and said faculty at the center are in the process of writing a response.
“Given the importance of foreign language in our current society, our aim is to have a student body equipped with (these skills),” Birckbichler said. “(Foreign language proficiency) plays a significant role in politics, economics, national security issues … and Ohio, in particular, is very diverse itself. We are committed to bring this essential part of the academic core to the students of OSU.”
Birckbichler said other concerns about the report include the committee’s lack of communication with the foreign language department during the construction of such a “huge change,” and the absence of a foreign language department member on the committee’s panel.
McHale said the new general education requirements are likely to affect all departments.
“Adversely in some ways, positively in others; we’re hoping that the up-sides will compensate for any down-sides,” he said. “In the case of the foreign languages, it’s perfectly possible that the new requirements wouldn’t affect them at all, or only slightly.”
“Our proposals also encourage upper-level foreign language instruction, study abroad and foreign language minors, so that even if there were some losses at the lower levels, these might be compensated for in higher-level foreign language courses,” McHale said.
Birckbichler said foreign language department faculty members may request a special meeting with the committee during the proposal’s review process.
A complete look at the committee’s review can be found on OSU’s Office of Academic Affairs Web site at oaa.osu.edu.
